Central Valley Project

1. Central Valley Project A New State of Water

2. The land frauds and the landgrabs compose the shabbiest chapter in our history. We have 75 years now of conservation as a (federal) government policy, of husbanding, developing, and using the publically owned natural resources for the public benefit. So we have grown used to believing that such corruption, such raids on the treasury, such blind imbecility were ended for all time.

3. But at this moment some powerful interests are preaching that what was intolerable corruption on a scale of half a million acres becomes wise public policy if you up the scale to half a billion acres. They are calling on Congress to legalize a final, conclusive raid on the publicly owned resources of the United States. 1953, Bernard DeVoto on the public lands

4. 450 miles long 40-70 miles wide Little precipitation and bad timing Extremely fertile Water in wrong places Serious floods Saltwater intrusion The Central Valley

5. State supervision of irrigation districts Flood control Valley wide plan Decreasing ground water Government Intervention

6. Army Corps of Engineers primarily flood control and navigation levees and redirection Bureau of Reclamation primarily irrigation dams and canal systems Compete over budgets and political power Corps or Bureau?

7. Not particularly successful Property –weighted voting monopoly power Water storage districts Kern County 125,000/250,000 votes! Local control failure to reach goals Irrigation Districts

8. Dam on the Sacramento River Aqueducts to both sides of Valley Water to Bay Area Improved navigation Prevent saltwater intrusion Water to LA area Electricity production Need Recognition

9. Progressive movement losing influence Private Power SCE and PG&E North worried about shipping water south Existing water rights holders Riparian supersedes appropriative 1928 vote “reasonable beneficial use.” County of origin law Issues

10. Depression – repudiate Republicans FDR= government intervention Republicans had to switch ideas The pendulum Political Evolution

11. Increased pressure to build something JOBS Need for Federal financing Pubic or private power “No public power, no federal help” July 1933, bill passed the state Depression and Drought

12. Private power lobbying LA against North in favor Valley in favor Federal takeover by Bureau Revolt

13. 20 dams • 500 miles of canals • 9 MAF • 2.5 municipal consumers • 3 million acres • Environmental benefits • 5.6 MkWH • 2 million customers • $34 million revenues The Task

14. 160 acres Excess sold within 10 years Excess sold at prices reflecting prior to water No interest on capital funding Costs reduced by electricity revenues 6% of owners held 53% of land! Reclamation Law

15. Many large farms predated the CVP “unearned increment” from CVP Dinuba study small farms = equality, higher living standards, schools and parks, and businesses study buried Acreage Limits?

16. Post war philosophy Increase Bureau’s budget Post war technology (not in book) 160 acres per shareholder or family member or employee Accelerated payoff Ignore residency requirement Ignore “unearned increment” Technical Compliance

17. Jefferson Vs Hamilton Should the Gov’t aid, support, subsidize or ignore private business? Large business or small business? Labor relations? GDP or singing and dancing? The Partnership Between Gov’t and Private Enterprise

18. Recall: Hoover Dam: LADWP and SCE Recall HetchHetchy: Municipal sold to PG&E Farmers want what? Power to be delivered in the North Large farms in the south Small farms in the North What is the conflict? Public or Private Power?

19. Power to the Bureau Used for Bureau pumps Excess sold to PG&E PG&E sells back to gov’t PG&E sells to customers Customers subsidize PG&E (monopoly) and agribusiness Power’s Technical Compliance

20. Electricity users (northern cities, SF, and small farms) were providing $300,000,000 in subsidies to the (large) Central Valley Farms! Southern cities, LA, did not need the power The Punch Line